ep1str0phy

Seriously--and to return to more solid ground--does anyone have the Simosko Dolphy book? It may have dealt with some of the material in question (the early works, I mean). The closest I've ever come to owning a copy was last Fall--when I borrowed it from a local library.

I'm just not sure that it's impossible to apprehend the "spirit" of the man with only a select set of recordings. I agree that added documentation can add to certain types of understanding--again, historical and technical details, developmental minutiae (not to demean any of it)--but I'd also argue that there's an intangible aspect to Dolphy (and other great artists/musicians) that projects itself immediately--a gut, supra-intellectual understanding. Again, I'm lapsing into fairly nebulous territory. But I cannot subscribe to the idea that a (relative) neophyte's fairly basic cognizance of Dolphy--the sound, the spirit is in any way inferior to ours. A feel for that "spirit" is far more immediate than knowledge of synthetics, rhythmic idiosyncrasies, timbral liberties, etc. It's the pivotal aspect of the artist's "whole"--that sort of "it" that critics and analysts strain to describe. Moreover, it's seems possible that certain recordings better represent this "it" better than others. At the very least, many, many people seem to consider "Out to Lunch" more essential than, say, the Hamilton sides (or even something like "Iron Man," more example). I've exhausted a somewhat obscure point, but I'd like to see someone else account for this--especially because we're dealing with the sort of esoterica (the Brownie sides) in question. As far as the "uncertain" big band appearances are concerned: I actually asked Gerald Wilson about this once. He said he took Dolphy on a bunch of rock and roll sides--presumably a euphemism for some of the known material, perhaps something forever lost to the void. At the very least, those "anonymous" early sides include some Mingus cuts. Important enough, no?

Anyone want to chime in on those "circulating" live tapes? Repertoire? Personnel (Bruce or Bruceless)?

Absolutely fascinating--man, I agree with you. However, I'm not sure that the merits of the music make for "essential" listening. Part of the problem is that we're dealing with a fairly vague definition of "essential." Operationally, several individuals seem to suggest that by essential we should mean those works that are absolutely invaluable toward developing an understanding of an artist. Perhaps, instead of comprehensive, I should say "sufficient"--a sufficient "feel for" the "essence" of an artist (and I apologize for drawing the conversation into such nebulous dregs). Is it truly necessary to examine every last facet of a musician's work in order to "get" that artist? Moreover, will thorough documentation better render the psychology, spirit, and "essence" of a specific musician? Speaking hypothetically, is my understanding of Dolphy inferior for having not heard the Brownie sides? Of course, limited familiarity with an artist's discography impairs knowledge of history, technical development, etc. But--for the neophytes, the laypeople, issues of economy and choice--is it all really the same? Part of a whole, yes... but would Dolphy say that it's all equally worthwhile? I mean, the Brownie album, bootleg concerts, even the Blue Note outtakes (none directly approved by ED himself)... what's really essential in understanding Dolphy the artist, his craft, and ideal?

Again--to stress an already exhausted point--to whom does this apply? May we speak in degrees? I don't think that many would argue that this sort of pseudo-bootleg esoterica (the Dolphy/Brownie album in question) is as "essential" as "Out to Lunch." At the risk of dissolving into semantics, what is "essential" anyway? Essential to he "in-crowd," or essential to everyone? Does the lay-collector--especially of the sort just beginning to listen to Dolphy--really need this material? Moreover, does knowledge of the entire history of an artist--from cradle to grave--really constitute a comprehensive "understanding"? Or can you really, truly "get" Dolphy from a few seconds of "Hat and Beard"? I know of enough individuals with an intelligent, passionate "feel" for Dolphy, none of whom have gotten past the canonical "five-star" albums. As far as I'm concerned, that sense of musician/listener communion is of paramount importance--far more valuable than whatever may be divined from a few low-fidelity home recordings.

And they always will. That shit was not "recorded well" originally. My advice - go for the LP/LPs and hear it the way it was originally heard. Less frustration that way. A real shame, regardless. Larry Young sounds like he's being recorded in a bathroom. Compare "Emergency" with the sound on the Blue Note sessions, or even "Turn It Over"--geez!

Interestingly enough, I named my dog Ayler. He has a white patch just below his lower jaw.

Good lord. Worth a laugh, anyway.

This has happened a few times (confusing, no?)--though not always with the same author. This one comes to mind: Booker Little: Victory and Sorrow (5 Stars) [review by Scott Yanow] Booker Little and Friend (4 1/2 Stars) [review by Scott Yanow] --They're the same damn album, although "and Friend" has outtakes. Just for the hell of it, this is from an old hardcopy of the allmusic guide: Brown Rice/1975/A&M 0809 o Don Cherry/i. May 1977/Horizon 717 According to the guide, "Don Cherry" is supposed to be one of Don's "landmark recordings" (hence the circle). However, Carl Brauer gives an "ambivalent" review (trashing the "funkish" cuts). Nothing is said about "Brown Rice"--no circle, no nothing. It's the same album. It's confusing, especially in the Marable/Clay case. Generally, I go with the more "thought out" reviews--a lot of those three-star, "list personnel only" critiques (like the first of the two Nastos reviews) are almost definitely placeholders. Like 3 Stars is the default or something.

Really, all of this information could be surmised through a careful examination of the recordings (or transcriptions, for ease of purpose). It looks remarkably pretty--and useful, in a way, for examining particular components of the improvisers' solos (e.g., use of space)--but, strangely, far less comprehensive than what can be purchased at your local sheet music shop. Additionally, this sort of analysis runs the risk of vastly oversimplifying the players in question, granted that all of the relevant information is broken up (this fails to examine, for example, the integration of melody/space and harmony, (again) all of which can be found elsewhere, but--really--isn't that some of the most interesting stuff?). All of it can be instructive, but it's smoke-and-mirrors--nothing really mindblowing. Of course, I'm stating the obvious. Seriously. Do Cecil Taylor.

Squiggles, I think. But I could be wrong.

The Harper/Tolliver engagement at Yoshi's (with John Hicks, Dwayne Burno, and Roy McCurdy) was unbelievable. Tremendous playing, excellent repertoire, all that jazz... Other mentions: Gerald Wilson Orchestra (a local LA gig), Haden's Liberation Music Orchestra, and Myra Melford's new Bay Area quartet. Looking forward to McCoy Tyner's two-week residency at Yoshi's (in a few weeks). You're so lucky to live in an area that has so many options.. The closest area to me is Chicago, almost 4 hrs from where I live in good weather.. When I lived in Oakland there were always places to go almost any day of the week.. Seriously. I'm in Berkeley most of the year, and it's a surprisingly fertile environment for improvised music (not just jazz). I keep telling myself I'll get more active in the Bay Area, but I've been sidelined (as of late)--fortunately, there's enough music to see.

Which version of the MJQ?

All of "Band of Gypsys." And "Little Wing." And "Voodoo Chile" (not slight return). Jimi was both an architect and an anarchist--a real fun dichotomy. Just for kicks--favorite solo on a Hendrix tune not performed by Jimi? -Billy Harper, "Castles Made of Sand" (from the Gil Evans Hendrix album)--he got it.

He was just getting it together as a composer and as an arranger. Would Led Zeppelin have been so wounderful if Jimi didn't create guitar orchestras? I think he was a fine composer/arranger, regardless. Still, there seems to be something remarkably "skeletal" about the compositions themselves--as if there were something intrinsically "unfinished" about a Jimi composition w/o the direct presence of Jimi the artist/mind. Jimi's tunes require vision. The vast body of aimless Hendrix covers is a testament to this fact; as far as I'm concerned, the best interpretations of Jimi's songs have been performed by individuals willing to impose themselves upon the compositions (e.g., the Gil Evans stuff, D&D's "Little Wing," although some may argue). In short, I don't think that Jimi is one of those writers whose tunes are or ever were "fully-formed." In such a manner, Hendrix (himself) became the final, "perfecting" component in his work--just as invaluable as the words, the chords, the melody (etc.). I agree with you, however, in that Jimi was reaching new levels of complexity toward the end of his life (imagine what "First Rays" would have become!).

As far as I'm concerned, Jimi was an even better "craftsman" than composer--at his poetic best in the studio, toiling away obsessively. That being said, I think "Band of Gypsys" is among the greatest electric guitar albums ever recorded--"greater," perhaps, than any of his studio work. Hendrix was most impressive in the middle ground... tight but loose, so to speak. That's why my favorite Hendrix "songs" (or cuts, really) are those wildly ambitious blowouts that never fail to inspire (or impress): If 6 Was 9, 1983, Castles Made of Sand ("Axis" and "Ladyland" are unmatched in sheer intricacy, vision, and mastery) It's all worth it, though.

The Harper/Tolliver engagement at Yoshi's (with John Hicks, Dwayne Burno, and Roy McCurdy) was unbelievable. Tremendous playing, excellent repertoire, all that jazz... Other mentions: Gerald Wilson Orchestra (a local LA gig), Haden's Liberation Music Orchestra, and Myra Melford's new Bay Area quartet. Looking forward to McCoy Tyner's two-week residency at Yoshi's (in a few weeks).

Easy to forget, having been released so early on. Very glad to see Grachan back in action--and with a top flight band, to boot! A fine trombone player, an icon of modern jazz, and easily one of the most interesting, idiosyncratic composers of the last few decades (it's a pity his output has been so minimal)... Grachan's always been a favorite, and I certainly hope that he records more in the future.

Strong commendations for the Free America Series--both musically and a commercially. After years of shoddy/inconsistent BYG reissues, the haphazard handling of Black Lion, Freedom, ESP, and Savoy albums (to name a few), and--now--the unfortunate "autopilot" to which the Impulse catalogue has been subjected, Free America has provided a shining example of how to package, market, and respect early free jazz (granted available resources). At no time in recent memory have I been so comprehensively impressed by a single reissue program--and what great music! When all is said and done, it's enough to glory in the fact that major companies are capable of understanding that avant-garde jazz can (and, at its best, invariably is) a music of art, culture, and class. Bravo.

Rats. 2005 isn't over yet. And I still want those late, late Coltrane sides released.

Christ, 2005 isn't done yet. On a side note--Marion Brown on bells? Come on, man.

I recall hearing of a (recorded) Trane date with Ornette on violin, although I may be thinking of the above. Coleman does have some personal tapes with Albert Ayler on them--again, sticking to trumpet (admittedly, I'd be psyched to hear Ornette's brass up 'gainst that classic Ayler wail). More to the matter at hand, Coltrane did (sort of) study with Coleman in the early 60's; I'm sure Coleman has some tapes of those personal meetings/jams (alongside the never-will-see-the-light-of-day Joujouka sides and those "original" quartet cuts from the late-70's).

What a trailblazer. Courage is right... courage, gusto, and joy. Seldom have I heard a musician--a guitarist--so insouciantly brave, uncompromising. As one in a long tradition of improvising axmen, forver chafing at the laws of principle, I'll always cherish those jagged, acidic lines. Here's to a liberator, one of the greats... the proverbial twanger just lost one more string. Edit to second recommendations on the "Improvisation" book--looks like a good time to break it out. Truth is marching in, baby.

A pity this date couldn't have been recorded better... I've had this CD for a number of years, and the sound is appalling. Fidelity concerns notwithstanding, this album has some of the finest JC Quartet playing I've heard--and Dolphy is, well, Dolphy (always welcome). It's doubly regrettable that the Dolphy/Trane partnership never got its proper due (recording-wise, canonically), especially considering the sheer quality of these performances. The two horns sustain an inhuman degree of energy, catalyzed, propelled by a superlative rhythm section. Dolphy's alto, in particular, is just diabolical--he's Coltrane's ebullient, luminescent foil, weightless and bright where his doppelganger is heavy and brooding. The spirit is infectious. Listen to the flute entrance on "My Favorite Things"--such passion, joie de vivre. This is definitely one of those dates where the music transcends the "listening experience." Sorry, had to gush.

Re: Judgment... definitely a scorcher. Surely my favorite vibes/piano quartet (anywhere)... has to be some of the most energizing, organic group interplay ever recorded on Blue Note (sorry to slide off-topic). On the matters at hand--I would have loved to have heard Stinson play Hill's music. There aren't too many bassists who wouldn't sound (rhythmically, harmonically) redundant in that context--he was/is one of them.